Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2008)
|Abstract||The “naturalistic turn” that has swept so many areas of philosophy over the past three decades has also had an impact in the last decade in legal philosophy. Methodological naturalists (M-naturalists) view philosophy as continuous with empirical inquiry in the sciences. Some M-naturalists want to replace conceptual and justificatory theories with empirical and descriptive theories; they take their inspiration from more-or-less Quinean arguments against conceptual analysis and foundationalist programs. Other M-naturalists retain the normative and regulative ambitions of traditional philosophy, but emphasize that it is an empirical question what normative advice is actually useable and effective for creatures like us. Some M-naturalists are also..|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Stuart Silvers (1992). A Stitchwork Quilt: Or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Cognitive Relativism. Philosophical Psychology 5 (4):391 – 410.
Paul Draper (2004). On the Nature of Naturalism. Philo 7 (2):146-155.
Martin O. Yalcin (2011). American Naturalism on Pantheism 1. American Journal of Theology and Philosophy 32 (2).
Brian Leiter (2009). Naturalizing Jurisprudence. In John R. Shook & Paul Kurtz (eds.), The Future of Naturalism. Humanity Books.
Tuomas K. Pernu (2008). Philosophy and the Front Line of Science. The Quarterly Review of Biology 83 (1):29-36.
Chase Wrenn (2006). Epistemology as Engineering? Theoria 72 (1):60-79.
Francesco Orsi (2006). Naturalism and the Buck-Passing Account of Value. Philosophical Writings 32:58-77.
David Copp (2003). Why Naturalism? Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 6 (2):179-200.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads16 ( #74,784 of 549,694 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,425 of 549,694 )
How can I increase my downloads?